Orthodontics
Orthodontics
Osmar Aparecido Cuoghi(a)
Geraldo Francisco Kasbergen(b)
Paulo Henrique dos Santos(c)
Marcos Rogério de Mendonça(a)
Pedro Marcelo Tondelli(d)
Department of Pediatric and Community
(a)
Dentistry, Faculdade de Odontologia de
Araçatuba, Unesp – Univ Estadual Paulista,
Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.
Department of Pediatric Dentistry,
(b)
Faculdade de Odontologia, Universidade
de Itaúna, Itaúna, MG, Brazil.
Department of Dental Materials and
(c)
Prosthodontics, Faculdade de Odontologia
de Araçatuba, Unesp – Univ Estadual
Paulista, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.
Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba,
(d)
Unesp – Univ Estadual Paulista, Araçatuba,
SP, Brazil.
Corresponding author:
Pedro Marcelo Tondelli
Disciplina de Ortodontia - Faculdade de
Odontologia de Araçatuba - UNESP
Rua José Bonifácio, 1193
Araçatuba - SP - Brazil
CEP: 16015-050
E-mail: tondelli.ortodontia@hotmail.com
Received for publication on Sep 16, 2010
Accepted for publication on Dec 07, 2010
128 Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34
Effect of heat treatment on stainless
steel orthodontic wires
Abstract: This study evaluated the effect of heat treatment on CrNi
stainless steel orthodontic archwires. Half of forty archwires of each
thickness – 0.014” (0.35  mm), 0.016” (0.40  mm), 0.018” (0.45  mm)
and 0.020” (0.50 mm) (totalling 160 archwires) – were subjected to heat
treatment while the remainder were not. All of the archwires had their
individual thickness measured in the anterior and posterior regions us-
ing AutoCad 2000 software before and after compressive and tensile
strength testing. The data was statistically analysed utilising multivari-
ance ANOVA at a 5% significance level. All archwires without heat
treatment that were subjected to tensile strength testing presented with
anterior opening, which was more accentuated in the 0.020” archwires.
In the posterior region, the opening produced by the tensile force was
more accentuated in the archwires without heat treatment. There was
greater stability in the thermally treated archwires, especially those sub-
jected to tensile strength testing, which indicates that the heat treatment
of orthodontic archwires establishes a favourable and indispensable con-
dition to preserve the intercanine width.
Descriptors: Orthodontic Wires; Stainless Steel; Tooth Movement.
Introduction
The effectiveness of orthodontic movement involves the adequate
interaction of factors related to the patient, mechanics, teeth and peri-
odontal supporting structures. The outcome of treatment is particularly
dependent upon the action of the orthodontic wires, according to their
structural and mechanical characteristics.1
In the traditional sequence of replacing stainless steel wires during the
levelling and alignment phases, the progressive transition from thinner to
thicker wires alter the amount of force released. 2 When the wire receives
a tensile force before reaching its limit of proportionality, it will respond
by returning to its original form and will therefore be in its elastic phase.
After passing the elastic limit, the wire will reach the plastic phase when
it changes its form, yet without returning to its original shape. If an ex-
aggerated force is applied, a permanent deflection occurs and the wire
no longer returns to its original form. This occurs because the deflection
surpasses the elastic limit of the wire. 3,4
When an orthodontic wire is deformed, several internal tensions oc-
cur, which means that its atoms are spatially dislocated and the inter-
atomic forces become unbalanced. This condition of instability is due to
 Cuoghi OA, Kasbergen GF, Santos PH, Mendonça MR, Tondelli PM
the fact that some atoms get too close to each other
while others become too distant. The atoms tend to
return to their original position by diffusion with
time and a consequence of this process, called stress
releasing, is wire distortion.3 In order to avoid this
phenomenon, after bending, the stainless steel wire
is heated to a temperature of 850°F for 3 minutes
until a reddish-brown colour is obtained. 5 This pro-
cedure is known as “heat treatment” and recovers
the normal aspect of the metal microstructure.4-6
Another method of performing this treatment is
passing the bent wire repeatedly through the flame
of an alcohol lamp until a reddish-brown colour is
observed in its entire extension. However, this pro-
cedure does not follow a technical standardisation.
Clinically, when the orthodontist makes loops,
bends or establishes a new arch form, the wire reach-
es a high internal pressure and should be thermally
treated in order to release these tensions.7 Only
conflicting and insufficient information is available
regarding the alterations induced by the heat treat-
ment, which makes this treatment a controversial
choice in orthodontics. These factors, allied with
the existence of only a small number of reported
studies regarding this subject, were the rationale
for the present study. To the best of our knowledge,
all available studies refer to laboratorial investiga-
tions and do not address this procedure under clini-
Figure 1 - Archwire with
demarcations positioned onto the
OrtoForm III Diagram – 3M/Unitek,
St. Paul, MN, USA.
cal conditions. It is common in orthodontic practice
to use an alcohol lamp or a welding machine with
a specific device for heat treatment. However, nei-
ther of these procedures follows rigorous time and
temperature standards. Therefore, since these proce-
dures are routinely performed by the majority of or-
thodontists, it is important to investigate their effect
on the physical properties of stainless steel wires.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ef-
fect of heat treatment on stainless steel orthodontic
archwires of different thicknesses when subjected to
compressive and tensile strength forces.
Material and methods
One hundred and sixty 150-mm-long round
chromium-nickel stainless steel orthodontic wires
(Morelli, Sorocaba, SP, Brazil) with thicknesses
of 0.014” (0.35  mm), 0.016” (0.40  mm), 0.018”
(0.45 mm) and 0.020” (0.50 mm) were used. Forty
archwires of each thickness were made by a single
operator using, as reference, the OrthoForm III dia-
gram (3M/Unitek, St. Paul, MN, USA) (Figure 1),
and were randomly chosen to receive or not heat
treatment (n  =  20 for each condition). Half of the
thermally and non-thermally treated archwires were
subjected to a compressive strength test and half
were subjected to a tensile strength test (n = 10 for
each condition). The forces were applied to both
Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34 129
 Effect of heat treatment on stainless steel orthodontic wires
archwire ends.
Transverse demarcations were plotted in the an-
terior and posterior regions of the archwires using
a diagram traced on an A4 sheet of graph paper in
order to analyse the occurrence of transverse altera-
tions in these regions. First, a horizontal line, per-
pendicular to a vertical midline, was traced at the
ends of the archwire to serve as a reference limit (A).
Then, a new horizontal line (B) was traced parallel
to the previous line and 20  mm above it, thus cre-
ating a reference for demarcation of two bilateral
points in the posterior region of the archwire and
establishing the intermolar width. The transverse
distance demarcated at the anterior region of the
archwires (C) corresponded to a mean intercanine
width of 35 mm, which has been established by van
der Linden.8 A standard diagram was thus obtained
for demarcation of the four points corresponding to
the intercanine and intermolar widths (Figure 2).
Each archwire was individually superposed onto
the diagram in order to bilaterally demarcate the
points corresponding to the intercanine and inter-
molar widths for subsequent measurement (Figure
2). Next, heat treatment was performed on 20 arch-
wires of each thickness using a welding machine
(model SMP 3000; Kernit Indústria Mecatrônica
Ltda., Indaiatuba, SP, Brazil; 500 W power, 4.0/2.0
A current, 50/60 Hz frequency) with a special device
130 Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34
(Figure 3). The machine was set at a power setting
of 3 and an electric current time of 8 seconds was
set for all thermally treated archwires. The remain-
ing 20 archwires of each thickness did not receive
heat treatment.
All 160 archwires were scanned with a desktop
scanner using 2400  dpi acquired resolution (HP
PSC 1510 All-in-One, Hewlett Packard, Sorocaba,
SP, Brazil) and measurements were carried out in
the anterior and posterior regions before and after
the compressive and tensile strength tests, using Au-
toCad 2000 software (Autodesk Inc., San Rafael,
CA, USA). The mechanical tests were performed in
a universal testing machine (model DL3000; EMIC,
São José dos Pinhais, PR, Brazil) with a 200 N load
cell and a crosshead speed of 2  cm/min. The com-
pressive and tensile strength tests were standardised
at a distance of 40 mm due to the limitations of the
testing machine during application of the compres-
sion force. The data was statistically analysed by
one-way multivariance ANOVA at a 5% signifi-
cance level.
Results
0.014” archwires
A statistically significant difference was only
found between the transverse distances in the pos-
terior region, obtained before and after tensile
Figure 2 - Archwire superposed
on the diagram with demarcation
of the points in the anterior and
posterior regions.
 Cuoghi OA, Kasbergen GF, Santos PH, Mendonça MR, Tondelli PM
Figure 3 - Welding machine
with the special device for heat
treatment.
strength testing for both the heat-treated archwires
(hereafter referred to as “HT archwires”) and the
archwires without heat treatment (hereafter re-
ferred to as “WHT archwires”) (p  =  0.0241 and
p = 0.0000063, respectively) (Table 1 and 2).
0.016” archwires
In the posterior region, a significant difference
was identified between the transverse distances ob-
tained before and after the compressive strength test
for the WHT archwires (p = 0.0007). A statistically
significant difference was found after the tensile
strength test for both the HT and WHT archwires
(p = 0.0124 and p = 0.0000019, respectively) (Table
1 and 2).
0.018” archwires
In the anterior region, a significant difference
was established between the transverse distances
obtained before and after the compressive strength
test for the HT archwires (p = 0.0003). In the poste-
rior region, there was a significant difference before
and after the tensile strength test for both HT and
WHT archwires (p = 0.0475 and p = 0.0000037, re-
spectively) (Table 1 and 2).
0.020” archwires
A significant difference was found in the ante-
rior region before and after the tensile strength test
for both HT and WHT archwires (p = 0.0404 and
p = 0.0025, respectively).
In the posterior region, a statistically signifi-
cant difference was identified before and after the
compressive strength test for the WHT archwires
(p = 0.0187), and in the same way before and after
the tensile strength test for both the HT and WHT
archwires (p = 0.00003 and p = 0.0000001, respec-
tively (Table 1 and 2).
Discussion
One of the major requisites of orthodontic me-
chanics is the maintenance of dental arch dimen-
sions using wires during dental movement. At com-
pletion of the tooth levelling/alignment phase, which
is guided by the analysis of the orthodontic diagram
and the use of different wire dimensions, a satisfac-
tory intra- and inter-arch relationship must be ob-
served.9 Claro et al.10 suggested that the increase in
arch perimeter is approximately given by the addi-
tion of 0.54 times the intercanine expansion, which
is useful in solving crowding cases, but Rudge11 and
de la Cruz et al.12 have advised that arch shape is the
best guidance for future stability. The use of pre-ad-
justed orthodontic accessories facilitates and simpli-
fies arch contouring, but does not eliminate the need
for individualising orthodontic archwires.13
Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34 131
 Effect of heat treatment on stainless steel orthodontic wires

Table 1 - Mean values and standard deviations (SD) in mm of the transverse dimensions in the anterior and posterior region of
the 0.014”, 0.016”, 0.018” and 0.020” archwires with and without heat treatment before and after the compressive strength test.

Anterior Region Posterior Region

Archwire Thickness Heat Treatment
Before Testing (n = 10) After Testing (n = 10) Before Testing (n = 10) After Testing (n = 10)
No (n = 20) 35.00 (0.36) a
34.84 (0.34) a
59.81 (0.27) a
59.61 (0.34)a
0.014” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 34.80 (0.37)a 34.77 (0.41)a 61.57 (0.91)a 61.33 (1.02)a
No (n = 20) 35.14 (0.50)a 34.96 (0.49)a 59.87 (0.18)a 59.15 (0.51)b
0.016” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 35.09 (0.43)a 35.10 (0.42)a 59.85 (0.39)a 59.65 (0.36)a
No (n = 20) 35.33 (0.53) a
35.26 (0.56) a
59.64 (0.13) a
59.47 (0.31)a
0.018” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 35.38 (0.20)a 34.96 (0.21)b 62.07 (1.14)a 61.70 (1.21)a
No (n = 20) 34.89 (0.21)a 34.81 (0.25)a 59.91 (0.24)a 59.52 (0.41)b
0.020” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 34.94 (0.50)a 35.03 (0.48)a 62.81 (0.69)a 62.85 (0.69)a

Different letters indicate statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).

Table 2 - Mean values and standard deviations (SD) in mm of the transverse dimensions in the anterior and posterior region
of the 0.014”, 0.016”, 0.018” and 0.020” archwires with and without heat treatment before and after the tensile strength test.

Anterior Region Posterior Region

Archwire Thickness Heat Treatment
Before Testing (n = 10) After Testing (n = 10) Before Testing (n = 10) After Testing (n = 10)
No (n = 20) 35.02 (0.37)a 35.21 (0.37)a 59.63 (0.22)a 61.88 (0.83)b
0.014” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 34.74 (0.49) a
34.94 (0.57) a
61.38 (0.59) a
62.09 (0.70)b
No (n = 20) 34.87 (0.53)a 35.31 (0.60)a 59.80 (0.34)a 62.75 (0.87)b
0.016” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 35.04 (0.45)a 35.17 (0.45)a 60.36 (0.60)a 61.29 (0.88)b
No (n = 20) 35.03 (0.48)a 35.49 (0.54)a 59.83 (0.24)a 62.72 (0.99)b
0.018” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 35.41 (0.52)a 35.45 (0.45)a 62.75 (0.98)a 63.70 (1.04)b
No (n = 20) 34.91 (0.41) a
35.69 (0.56) b
59.66 (0.34) a
65.06 (0.92)b
0.020” (n = 40)
Yes (n = 20) 35.10 (0.28)a 35.46 (0.44)b 63.10 (0.53)a 64.85 (0.68)b

Different letters indicate statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).

In the tooth leveling/alignment phase, when statistical significance.

stiffer and thicker wires are required, stainless steel
archwires are frequently used according to pre-es-
tablished individual diagrams. During contouring,
stainless steel wires reach a high level of internal
tension and require heat treatment for release of this
tension.3,7 The increased elastic strength is the most
significant effect of heat treatment. An elastically
stronger working appliance is more likely to return
to its original shape, without suffering any perma-
nent deflection.14
In the present study, all WHT archwires subject-
ed to compressive strength testing presented with
little decrease in the width in the anterior region be-
fore and after the mechanical test, though without
All WHT archwires subjected to tensile strength
testing presented with a tendency towards pro-
gressive and more accentuated transverse altera-
tions in the anterior region, according to the wire
thickness. In the 0.020” WHT archwires, the in-
tercanine width increased significantly from 34.91
to 35.69  mm, more than HT archwires which in-
creased from 35.10 to 35.46  mm (Table 2). These
findings show that, when no heat treatment is per-
formed, as the wire thickness increases, then the
forces that cause wire expansion may modify the
intercanine width.
In the anterior region, which is commonly re-
ferred to in literature as responsible for most re-

132 Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34

 Cuoghi OA, Kasbergen GF, Santos PH, Mendonça MR, Tondelli PM
lapses after orthodontic treatment,15 the WHT
archwires had a greater tendency to open after the
tensile strength test. These results establish an im-
portant clinical safety procedure: to perform the HT
on stainless steel orthodontic wires, thus preserving
the intercanine distance during tooth leveling and
alignment. Little15 and Vanarsdall Junior16 demon-
strated that the main reason for the recurrence of
antero-inferior tooth crowding is the increase in the
intercanine distance during orthodontic treatment.
In the posterior region, all WHT archwires pre-
sented with a decrease in the transverse distance to
compressive strength, which was significant for the
0.016” and 0.020” archwires.
All WHT archwires presented with a significant-
ly greater opening after the tensile strength test. The
0.020” archwires exhibited an increase of approxi-
mately 6 mm, while the other wire thicknesses pre-
sented with openings between 2 and 3  mm (Table
2). These results revealed a “difficulty” in preserv-
ing the intermolar distance when the orthodon-
tic mechanics promotes an opening force in WHT
archwires and this was shown most evidently in the
expansion of the thicker archwire (0.020”). The ef-
fect of heat treatment is evident on HT archwires,
which indicated an increase of 1.75  mm (0.020”)
and the other wire thicknesses presented with open-
ings of approximately 1 mm.
For the tensile strength testing performed in the
anterior region of the HT archwires, slight openings
were observed for the 0.014”, 0.016” and 0.018”
archwires. However, in the 0.020” archwires, the
transverse distance increased by 0.36  mm, that is,
they presented with a greater tendency than the oth-
er wire thicknesses to an increase of the transverse
distance in the anterior region, when subjected to
tensile strength testing.
The results of this study demonstrated that the
References
1. Burstone CJ. Variable-modulus orthodontics. Am J Orthod.
1981 Jul;80(1):1-16.
2. Walters NE. A rationale for the selection of orthodontic wires.
Eur J Orthod. 1992 Jun;14(3):240-5.
HT performed in daily clinical practice establishes
a favourable and determinant condition to preserve
intercanine width. Several authors have expressed
their concern with the maintenance of the interca-
nine width in the post-orthodontic treatment peri-
od.9,17,18
The archwires subjected to the HT and com-
pressive strength testing presented with a tendency
to reduce the posterior transverse distance though
in smaller proportions, since no significant differ-
ences were observed in any statistical comparisons.
The results demonstrate a greater shape stability of
the HT archwires when subjected to compressive
strength testing.
During the compressive and tensile strength
tests, the HT archwires demonstrated a smaller ten-
dency to transverse changes in the anterior and pos-
terior regions, when compared to WHT archwires.
Therefore further studies should be performed.
Conclusions
Based on the employed methodology and the
obtained results, the following conclusions may be
drawn:
1. The archwires with and without heat treatment
subjected to compressive strength testing pre-
sented with minor transverse changes in the an-
terior and posterior regions.
2. All archwires without heat treatment subjected
to tensile strength testing presented with sig-
nificant openings in the posterior region. In the
anterior region, openings also occurred in all
archwires, but they were more accentuated in the
0.020” archwires.
3. The archwires which experienced heat treatment
were more resistant to the transverse changes in
both anterior and posterior regions when sub-
jected to tension.
3. Gjerdet NR, Hero H. Metal release from heat-treated orth-
odontic archwires. Acta Odontol Scand. 1987 Dec;45(6):409-
14.
4. Kusy RP. A review of contemporary archwires: their properties
and characteristics. Angle Orthod. 1997 Jun;67(3):197-207.
Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34 133
 Effect of heat treatment on stainless steel orthodontic wires
5. Funk AC. The Heat-treatment of the stainless-steel. Angle
Orthod. 1951 Jul;21(3):129-38.
6. Kohl RW. Metallurgy in orthodontics. Angle Orthod.
1964 Jan;34(1):37-62.
7. Oh KT, Kim KN. Ion release and cytotoxicity of stainless steel
wires. Eur J Orthod. 2005 Dec;27(6):533-40.
8. van der Linden FPGM. Development of the dentition. 1st ed.
Chicago: Quintessence; 1983. 213 p.
9. Lee RT. Arch width and form: a review. Am J Orthod Dento-
facial Orthop. 1999 Mar;115(3):305-13.
10. Claro CAA, Abrão J, Reis SAB, Fantini SM. Correlation be-
tween transverse expansion and increase in the upper arch
perimeter after rapid maxillary expansion. Braz Oral Res.
2006 Jan-Mar;20(1):76-81.
11. Rudge SJ. Dental arch analysis: arch form. A review of the
literature. Eur J Orthod. 1981 Oct-Dec;3(4):279-84.
12. de la Cruz A, Sampson P, Little RM, Årtun J, Shapiro PA.
Long-term changes in arch form after orthodontic treat-
134 Braz Oral Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-34
ment and retention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995
May;107(5):518-30.
13. McLaughlin RP, Bennett JC, Trevisi HJ. Systemized orthodon-
tic treatment mechanics. 1st ed. Edinburgh: Mosby; 2001. 324
p.
14. Backofen WA, Gales GF. The low temperature heat-treat-
ment of stainless steel for orthodontics. Angle Orthod. 1951
Apr;21(2):117-24.
15. Little RM. Stability and relapse of mandibular anterior align-
ment: University of Washington studies. Semin Orthod. 1999
Sep;5(3):191-204.
16. Vanarsdall Junior RL. Transverse dimension and long-term
stability. Semin Orthod. 1999 Sep;5(3):171-80.
17. Baluta J, Lavelle CLB. An analysis of dental arch form. Eur J
Orthod. 1987 May;9(2):165-71.
18. Bishara SE, Chadra JM, Potter RB. Stability of interca-
nine width, overbite and overjet correction. Am J Orthod.
1973 Jun;63(6):588-95.